Home financing ever possible? Probably not!

Of course, nuclear energy is safe if corruption and greed are prevented

with proper technology and procedure

Randomness-free, perfect order without (borderline chaotic) external influences? Utopia.
In this utopia, there would be no you, me, or any of us.

Randomness-free, perfect order without (boundary-chaotic) external influences? Utopia. In this utopia, you, me, all of us would not exist.

Chaos theory unfortunately teaches us that this perfect order does not exist... and can never exist, because there are chaotic systems on the planet that we cannot influence.

The transition to a colder world would lead to extreme distribution struggles, no question. But why should corpses "pave" the way into a warmer world, where there is more to distribute?:oops:
I don't understand that.....

Really now??

It's like saying you can't understand how industrialization in the 19th century could have claimed so many victims… but to be specific:

The whole problem of climate change is really about the speed of change, not the end state.

The "corpses" come from the fact that human-caused global warming is happening extremely fast. Normally, it takes a few millennia for +1°C, right now we're well under a century per degree. Roughly a factor of 20.
That overwhelms the adaptability of ecosystems and constantly requires humans to come up with solutions for the problems that arise. Costly solutions. And no matter how much money is spent on solving them, there will be migration flows heading to where other people already are. Migration flows that wouldn't have existed under a stable climate.

All triggered by a change completely caused by humans.

Many will be left behind, historically the poorest the most. And then, in 100 years, it will also affect the big coastal cities of the first world. Hundreds of millions of people live there. That will be… interesting.

Honestly, one doesn't really have valid data regarding the rate of change. No one can say whether a climate change 2 million years ago took place within 100 or 1,000 years. Measurements of core samples, etc., don't really provide that information; there are significant uncertainties...

What is striking, however, is the correlation between the beginning of industrialization, that is, the use of fossil fuels, and climate change. That is hard to refute if one wants to argue seriously. Just considering the distance to the sun and sunspots... it becomes difficult...

But... and this is where science begins. There is no 100% proof, that is, no empirical or model-based evidence. These are probabilities. And in the case of a probable catastrophe, one should of course always err on the safe side.

I strongly doubt that the switch from a warm period to the last ice age took millennia. That contradicts the climate theory of the "tipping point," which climate activists like to invoke.

One can only accept one truth. Either there are tipping points that lead us extremely quickly into catastrophe. Or a change takes place slowly over millennia. Then it really does not matter for us and future generations whether we do anything at all.

PS: And that is also important for people. In the generation of my grandchildren, I can still think about it, although I will probably never see them. But in the generation of the grandchildren of the grandchildren? That is too far away to motivate me...

Random-free, perfect order without (border-chaotic) external influences? Utopia. In this utopia, you, me, all of us would not exist.

Sufficiently safe then okay? We like to move away from 100%. 99% is enough for me. The possible nuclear escalation in the Ukraine war worries me CLEARLY much more :(

Although, to be honest, there are no really valid data regarding the rate of change. No one can say whether a climate change 2 million years ago took place within 100 or 1,000 years. Measurements from ice cores, etc., do not really provide that, there are large uncertainties...

What is striking, however, is the correlation between the beginning of industrialization, that is the use of fossil fuels, and climate change. This is difficult to refute if one wants to argue seriously. Just the distance to the sun and sunspots... that will be difficult...

But... and this is where science begins. There is no 100% proof, that is, no empirical or model-based evidence. These are probabilities. And in the case of a probable catastrophe, one should of course always err on the safe side.

I seriously doubt that the transition from a warm period to the last ice age took millennia. That contradicts the climate theory of the "tipping point," which climate activists like to invoke.

One can only acknowledge one truth. Either there are tipping points that lead us extremely quickly into catastrophe. Or a change takes place slowly over millennia. Then, it really does not matter to us and future generations whether we do anything at all.

PS: And this is also important for people. I can still consider the generation of my grandchildren, although I will probably never see them. But the generation of the grandchildren's grandchildren? That is too far away to motivate me...

A lot is getting mixed up here.

For 2 million years ago, the temporal resolution from ice core data is good enough. Not for 50 million years ago.

The speed has nothing to do with whether there are tipping points and where they are. The periodic change between warm and cold periods is due to the Milankovitch cycles, which are changes in the Earth's orbit on ten-thousand-year rhythms. This modulates the solar constant, that is, the energy that arrives from the sun to the Earth.

For anthropogenic global warming and its cause, there are indeed very clear empirical proofs. Probably the second best empirically supported physical description after quantum mechanics. However, to project this into the future, where no one knows the exact emissions, computational models with assumptions and uncertainties are of course required, what else?

Tipping points also do not lead "immediately" to any catastrophes. If the Greenland ice sheet tips, its melting still takes about 8,000 years or so. One does not exclude the other. Whether that then is a catastrophe can only be judged afterwards.

—————

There are surprisingly many misconceptions on this topic — please do not take this personally, I am simply stating facts.